244 THE .TOURNVL OF EOT AN S" 



Tias ringed spots. It certainly often lias them, especiall}'' in luxuriant 

 spjcimens, but is just as often without them ; we have found })lants 

 of more than one type which differed in no particular of importance 

 except that some had solid spots and others rings. We should agree, 

 as against Dr. Druco, that the presence of rings is no sure test of the 

 presence of a cross ; in many cases the rings plainly indicate a fulness 

 and even excess of pigment, not its dilution — for instance, ringed 

 spots are sometimes found in pure 0. ericetonim. We have seen 

 plants of this species on Tregaron Bog with very strongly marked 

 rings on the leaves ; on the other hand, it is quite common to see 

 very faint rings or blotches or spots, and here probably a cross is 

 involv^ed. 



In cases of undoubted natural hybrids there is much variation in 

 the matter of sjjots, though we have not as much evidence on the 

 point as we should like. Hybrids of O. ericetonim v,'\i\\ Gymnadenia 

 eoiiopsea have been seen by us («) with unspotted leaves, {h) with 

 slight and few spots, (c) with numerous small spots, and {d) with 

 blotches but not rings. Hybrids between O. macnlata and species 

 with unspotted leav^es may therefore have unspotted leaves ; but in 

 this case one would have to be sure that' the parent maculaia itself 

 was without spots. Until a point like this has been much more full}'" 

 investigated, we cannot say whether spots are necessarily a dominant 

 c*h;iracter ; full notes about the occurrence of spots in plants of 

 O. Ilephuriiii and O. Scampstonensis would be of considerable in- 

 terest in this connection. Mr. St. Quintin reports in a letter that the 

 hybrids of O. foliosa with 0. Fuchsii at Scampston Hall have in 

 some cases spots, in others blotches ; sometimes well-marked rings 

 and sometimes very faint rings. 



Col. Godfery asks several questions, the answers to which would, 

 when collated from many districts, be of great significance. It would 

 help much to know of localities in which O. lafifoUa grows, as it 

 certainly does on the Continent, apart fi'om other forms, or apart 

 from one of the groups from which h3^bridization is claimed always 

 to occur. The fact is that O. maculata, in some form, is so ubiquitous 

 that it is difficult to find any place where orchids grow from which it 

 is absent. 



The general principle on which we are wo)-king in regard to 

 the leaf-character is that O. incarnata and O. irrcetermissa (and 

 O. O'KeJIyi) never have spotted leaves, and that O. jnrrpurella^ 

 O. latifolia, O. Fuchsii^ and O. cricetorum normally have spotted 

 leaves, though in each case some individuals are without them. 

 Mr. A. D. Webster, who has studied carefully the variation of 

 (9. maculata, says {British Orchids, pp. 64, 65) : " In several districts 

 I have noted that the proportion of these (unspotted plants) to that 

 of the typical plant is as three to seven." He can find no cause for 

 the variation either in soil, altitude or situation. 



In regard to the genetic relations of the forms, we are in the 

 region of almost pure speculation. We have a few cases of undoubted 

 natural hybrids, but otherwise no experimental work to record. In 

 order to get light on the vexed question of O. latifolia, we need 



